DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, PUNJAB.
Complaint Case No: CC/14/2024
Date of Institution: 06.02.2024
Date of Decision: 18.09.2024
1. Kulwinder Singh son of Gurmail Singh & Shinder Kaur resident of near railway station, Khudi road, Gram Panchayat Bika Sooch Patti, Handiaya, District Barnala, Punjab.
2. Mandeep Kaur daughter of Gurmail Singh & Shinder Kaur now wife of Dalwinder Singh resident of H.No.91/1, Kodtham Ramsar Dehati, Barnala District Barnala.
…Complainants
Versus
1. Union Bank of India, SCF-18, Opp. LIC Office, 22 Acre, Barnala through its Branch Manager.
2. United India Insurance Co. Dhanaula Road, Near PSPCL, Barnala through its Branch Manager.
3. M/s United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Khati Bazar, Branch Office, Rampura Phul-151103, District Bathinda through its Branch Manager.
…Opposite Parties
Complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Present: Sh. Jashan Modi Adv counsel for complainants.
Opposite party No. 1 exparte.
Sh. Amit Goyal Adv counsel for opposite parties No. 2 & 3.
Quorum.-
1. Sh. Ashish Kumar Grover: President
2. Sh. Navdeep Kumar Garg: Member
(ORDER BY ASHISH KUMAR GROVER PRESIDENT):
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 against Union Bank of India, SCF-18, Opp. LIC Office, 22 Acre, Barnala through its Branch Manager & others (in short the opposite parties).
2. The facts leading to the present complaint are that Shinder Kaur widow of Gurmail Singh opened an SB A/c No. 116222010000790 for the insurance of Shinder Kaur under PMSBY0017847594-625827912-18.11.2022 to 31.5.2023 and nominated her son Kulwinder Singh, the complainant No. 1 and the name of the nominee has been shown in the records of the bank but has not been written in the pass book as such the present complaint is filed through legal heirs after the death of Shinder Kaur who died on 17.3.2023. It is further alleged that the father of the complainant has already died on 10.11.2006, as such Kulwinder Singh and Mandeep Kaur are the only legal heirs of Shinder Kaur. It is alleged that OP No. 1 did not supply the copy Insurance policy and its terms and conditions being Group Insurance Policy. It is further alleged that on 17.03.2023 when Shinder Kaur was cutting cattle feed through Toka Machine suddenly her Dupatta came in contact with the Toka Machine and she got seriously injured and became unconscious and immediately taken to Civil Hospital, Barnala and the doctors at the hospital declared her dead and post mortem was conducted by the doctors. The complainants lodged DDR No.17 dated 18.03.2023 at PS Barnala. It is alleged that on 03.04.2023 the complainant No. 1 filed an application with OP No. 1 to get the insurance claim of Rs. Two Lakh as insurance under scheme PMSBY0017847594-625827912-18.11.2022 to 31.05.2023 and on the direction of OP No.1 the complainant submitted Kursinama issued by the Tehsildar Barnala, self declaration letter, death certificate of Shinder Kaur and her Adhaar Card, death certificate of Gurmail Singh and adhaar card of complainants. It is alleged on 21.09.2023 the complainant gave 15 days notice to OP No.1 for the settlement of the claim but all in vain. The complainant lodged a complaint with Reserve Bank of India who informed that Insurance Company of the deceased is United India Insurance Co., but the RBI is not authorized to interfere in the insurance matters. Thereafter, the complainants visited the office of OPs many a times to get the insured amount but the OPs avoided the complainant on one pretext or the other and ultimately on 18.01.2024 the OPs flatly refused to accede to the request of the complainant. The said act & conduct of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence, the present complaint is filed for seeking the following reliefs.-
- The opposite party may be directed to pay a sum of Rs. 200,000/-alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of death i.e.17.3.2023 till realization.
- To pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation as physical and mental pain, agony and harassment.
- Further, to pay Rs. 33,000/- as litigation expenses.
3. The opposite party No. 1 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 15.3.2024 due to non appearance.
4. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite parties No. 2 & 3 appeared and filed written version by taking preliminary objections interalia on the grounds that the complainants have never approached/ contacted the officials of the answering opposite parties, as no letter/ document has been annexed with the complaint by the complainant wherefrom it could be presumed that he ever contacted the answering respondent, as such the present complaint against the answering opposite parties as the complaint is pre-mature and is not maintainable in the eyes of law. It is further alleged that relevant document and provide reasonable time to answering opposite parties for its verification and to decide the matter as per law. The answering opposite parties reserves its right to file/ submit fresh reply/ version upon receipt and verification of the document as per rules. It is alleged that as per record, a Memorandum of Understanding was executed between answering opposite parties and Union Bank of India vide deed dated 06.09.2022, wherein at page No 2, in Eligibility Conditions have been defined, wherein it has been agreed between the parties that Bank officials would get the consent of eligible parties in writing for allowing them to join/enable auto debit facilities to enroll them under the scheme. It is further alleged that in the present case, neither any such document has ever been got signed by the bank officials from the deceased nor any such document provided to the answering opposite parties, as such there was no legally enforceable contract between the complainant and the answering opposite parties, as such the answering opposite parties are not bound to pay anything to complainant. The complainants have no locus-standi to file the present complaint against opposite parties and the complainants have no cause of action against opposite parties.
5. On merits, it is alleged that the contents of Para No 1 of the complaint, relates to OP No 1, who has already been preceded exparte, as such no reply by the contents of Para No 1 of the complaint, it is submitted that this para relates to OP No 1, who has already been preceded exparte, as such no reply by OP No 2 and 3 is required. The facts mentioned in the preliminary submissions may please be read here as reply to the contents of this Para as well. All other allegations of the complaint are denied and prayed for the dismissal of complaint.
6. Ld. Counsel for complainant on 23.4.2024 has suffered the statement that I do not want to file any rejoinder against the version of opposite parties No. 2 & 3.
7. To prove the case the complainants tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Ex.C-1, copy of passbook as Ex.C-2, copy of DDR as Ex.C-3 (containing 2 pages), copy of death certificate as Ex.C-4, copy of letter dated 03.04.2023 as Ex.C-5, copy of death certificate of Gurmail Singh as Ex.C-6, application dated 24.04.2023 as Ex.C-7 (containing 5 pages), copy of application dated 21.09.2023 as Ex.C-8, copy of letter from RBI as Ex.C-9, copy of Post Mortem Report as Ex.C-10 (containing 6 pages) and closed the evidence.
8. The opposite parties No. 2 & 3 tendered into evidence copy of policy Ex.O.P2.3/1, copy of agreement Ex.O.P2.3/2 and closed the evidence.
9. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
10. Ld. Counsel for the complainant argued that Shinder Kaur widow of Gurmail Singh opened an SB A/c No. 116222010000790 for the insurance of Shinder Kaur under PMSBY0017847594-625827912-18.11.2022 to 31.5.2023 and nominated her son Kulwinder Singh and the name of the nominee has been shown in the records of the bank but has not been written in the pass book as such the present complaint is filed through legal heirs after the death of Shinder Kaur who died on 17.3.2023 (as per Ex.C-2). It is further argued that opposite party No. 1 did not supply the copy Insurance policy and its terms and conditions being Group Insurance Policy. It is further argued that on 17.03.2023 when Shinder Kaur was cutting cattle feed through Toka Machine suddenly her Dupatta came in contact with the Toka Machine and she got seriously injured and became unconscious and immediately taken to Civil Hospital, Barnala and the doctors at the hospital declared her dead and post mortem was conducted by the doctors (as per Ex.C-10). It is further argued that the complainants lodged DDR No.17 dated 18.03.2023 at PS Barnala Ex.C-3. It is argued that on 03.04.2023 the complainant No. 1 filed an application Ex.C-5 with opposite party No. 1 to get the insurance claim of Rs. Two Lakh as insurance under scheme PMSBY0017847594-625827912-18.11.2022 to 31.05.2023 and on the direction of opposite party No.1 the complainant submitted Kursinama Ex.C-7 issued by the Tehsildar Barnala, self declaration letter, death certificate of Shinder Kaur and her Adhaar Card, death certificate of Gurmail Singh and adhaar card of complainants. It is further argued that on 21.09.2023 the complainant gave 15 days notice Ex.C-8 to opposite party No.1 for the settlement of the claim but all in vain.
11. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the opposite parties No. 2 & 3 argued that the complainants have never approached/contacted the officials of the opposite parties, as no letter/document has been annexed with the complaint by the complainant wherefrom it could be presumed that they ever contacted the opposite parties, as such the present complaint against the opposite parties is pre-mature and is not maintainable in the eyes of law. It is further argued that the complainant have failed to submit relevant document and to provide reasonable time to opposite parties for its verification and to decide the matter as per law. It is argued that as per record a Memorandum of Understanding was executed between opposite parties and Union Bank of India vide deed dated 06.09.2022 i.e.Ex.O.P2.3/2 wherein at page No 2, in Eligibility Conditions have been defined, wherein it has been agreed between the parties that Bank officials would get the consent of eligible parties in writing for allowing them to join/enable auto debit facilities to enroll them under the scheme. It is further argued that in the present case neither any such document has ever been got signed by the bank officials from the deceased nor any such document provided to the opposite parties, as such there was no legally enforceable contract between the complainant and the opposite parties and the opposite parties are not bound to pay anything to complainants.
12. We have carefully gone through the facts and evidence produced by both the parties. The complainants to prove their case has placed on record copy of Passbook of deceased Shinder Kaur Ex.C-2 from which it shows that on 18.11.2022 an amount of Rs. 20/- has been debited from the account of deceased Shinder Kaur by the opposite party No. 1 for accidental insurance of Shinder Kaur in PMSBY0017847594-625827912- 18-11-2022 to 31.5.2023 and this fact is also proved from Ex.O.P2.3/1 copy of Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana Policy placed on record by the opposite parties No. 2 & 3 vide which it is mentioned that the period of insurance from 1.6.2022 to 31.5.2023. It is further mentioned in the insurance policy that Capital sum insured is Rs. 2,00,000/- per member. The complainants to prove their case have further placed on record copy of Post Mortem Examination Report of Shinder Kaur Ex.C-10 vide which the cause of death mentioned as “THE CAUSE OF DEATH IN THIS CASE IS SUDDEN RESPIRATORY FAILURE DUE TO CHOKING WHILE OPERATING TOKA MACHINE DUPATTA CAME AROUND NECK”. To prove their case the complainants also placed on record copy of DDR No. 017 dated 18.3.2023 Ex.C-3 of Police Station, Barnala. Further, Ex.C-4 is the copy of death certificate of deceased Shinder Kaur. The complainants have also placed on record copies of applications i.e. Ex.C-5 & Ex.C-8 which were written to the Branch Manager of Union Bank of India, Barnala for getting the accidental claim of insurance of deceased Shinder Kaur. On the other hand, the opposite party No. 1 who deducted the amount of Rs. 20/- (as per Ex.C-2) from the account of deceased Shinder Kaur on account of PMSBY scheme has not come to contest the claim of the complainants and has preferred to remain exparte. So, from the above facts and evidence produced by the complainants it established that the deceased Shinder Kaur had died due to accident as mentioned in the Postmortem report Ex.C-10 and entitled for the above said insurance claim amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-. But the opposite parties have not settled the genuine insurance claim of the deceased Shinder on unreasonable and unjustified grounds which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. Therefore, the complainants being the legal heirs of the deceased Shinder Kaur are entitled for the claim amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- as per PMSBY accidental death policy Ex.O.P2.3/1. The opposite party No. 1 has not appeared and failed to produce any document to prove that opposite party No. 1 has performed their duties and obligations by forwarding the claim to opposite parties No. 2 & 3 i.e. insurance company for settlement. In this way the opposite party No. 1 is also deficient to perform their duties which amounts to clear cut deficiency in service.
13. In view of the above discussion, the present complaint is partly allowed and the opposite parties are directed to pay the claim amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- as per insurance policy Ex.O.P2.3/1 to the complainants being legal heirs of deceased Shinder Kaur in equal shares alongwith interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing the present complaint till its actual realization. The opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- on account of compensation for causing mental torture, agony and harassment suffered by the complainants and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainants. Compliance of this order be made within the period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:
18th Day of September, 2024
(Ashish Kumar Grover)
President
(Navdeep Kumar Garg)
Member
